Which is interesting that Rift won most improved game. Going from Cata to Mists is like going from a negative 10 to at least a solid 6-7. Going from Rift to SL is like going from already an 8 to a 10. (if sources can be believed)

I definitely will heap mounds of praise on Rift, sine I'm loving the crap out of it now...but most improved, no way. (I didn't play original Rift, so I can't comment completely accurately...though from the way people talk and review it, there's no way it was bad at all, and nowhere near as terrible as Cata).

Please note this post is not to start a flame war or game comparisons, just using some simple logic here.

For expansion of the year they are certainly not going by popularity, number of subscribers, most profitable, most features..in the end the only common metric I can find for all the award is the publishers own personal opinions. That's fine, because that is how most awards go out, but the gaming news industry is so bloated with biased writings its hard to take anything they say seriously.

For expansion of the year they are certainly not going by popularity, number of subscribers, most profitable, most features..in the end the only common metric I can find for all the award is the publishers own personal opinions. That's fine, because that is how most awards go out, but the gaming news industry is so bloated with biased writings its hard to take anything they say seriously.

Not really. Do you think Justin Biebers music is good quality? I don't even consider it music lol. But the fact that so many other people do has earned him the awards and fame that he has gotten.

Likewise, if the majority of players in the MMO community prefer one game over another it means that the overall quality of that game is superior, even if their definition or the game's quality isn't the quality you consider.

Thats why any business that values the quality of their product will try to evaluate it from their customers directly or indirectly, not from some panel of judges giving their opinions.